I'm thinking a decent two-channel amplifier to power a set of components in each door.

The speaker slot in the door is 6x8 size but I am willing to cut into the panel to place the midbass and the tweeter. I am also interested in a 4-Channel amp, two component sets setup if its ideal for my vehicle.

So any recommendation on which setup I should go for?

4-Channel Amplifier
2x Component speaker set

2-Channel Amplifier
Component set

Recommendations for which amplifier and component set I should get? And if I do op for cutting into the door panel, what could I do to hide or cover up the neglected speaker slot in the door?

Trepkos

07-19-2007, 09:45 AM

Tellz mees, I giv free candies!!

tbasile1

07-19-2007, 10:32 AM

Do you have a substage, or plan on it?

If so, comps in the back is kinda waste of money, if you want to do rears, just get some coaxials

Heres what you can do, get a nice 6.5 component set and amp them, and run rears off the HU, or just get a nice comp set and forget about the rears

And how much do you want to spend??

EDIT: and to fit a 6.5 in a 6x8 location, just make a baffle out of some MDF so you can mount the 6.5

DejaWiz

07-19-2007, 10:43 AM

Fronts only with some kind of sub stage. Sub stage doesn't have to be wild by any means.. heck, even a little 8" sub in a small sealed enclosure off a 100w rms amp would provide more impact than a second set of midrange and tweeters mounted in the rear.

Trepkos

07-19-2007, 11:00 AM

Fronts only with some kind of sub stage. Sub stage doesn't have to be wild by any means.. heck, even a little 8" sub in a small sealed enclosure off a 100w rms amp would provide more impact than a second set of midrange and tweeters mounted in the rear.

Lots of positive reviews out there for that comp set, so good choice. Try to find an amp that does at least 2x120w rms if not upwards of 2x160-200w rms. Those RSd's will soak it up and the results should be fabulous.

tbasile1

07-19-2007, 11:09 AM

Thats a really nice comp set

I think we've recommended this amp to others with those PGs

http://www.millionbuy.com/prfap1000.html

Just set the gains right and you should be fine!!

DejaWiz

07-19-2007, 11:22 AM

^ very decent budget amps.

To give those comps 120w rms per channel, the amp's output voltage would be 21.9V, measures with a DMM and test tone playback.

SQRT(WATTS * OHMS) = OUTPUT VOLTAGE

SQRT(120 * 4) = 21.9V

If you are going to set the gains yourself and not already familiar with the procedure, please read the sticky here and/or click the link in my sig.

genxx

07-19-2007, 01:14 PM

X3-On this set-up. The PG Rsd are impressive for the price and that profile is an excellent budget amp. The amp will allow you plenty of headroom and the PG rsd like a little pwr. Great recommendations on this set-up.

dwynne

07-19-2007, 06:11 PM

Thats a really nice comp set

I think we've recommended this amp to others with those PGs

http://www.millionbuy.com/prfap1000.html

Just set the gains right and you should be fine!!

What about spending $5 more and getting the AP1040 4 channel. You could bridge it (assuming the components are 4 ohms) and get the same power out. Add an active x-over now or later and run without the passive for better sound? It would not get as loud as it would run passive with the AP1000 2 channel, but it might be loud enough, not much more expensive, and sound better?

http://www.millionbuy.com/prfap1040.html

Dennis

Trepkos

07-19-2007, 09:16 PM

What about spending $5 more and getting the AP1040 4 channel. You could bridge it (assuming the components are 4 ohms) and get the same power out. Add an active x-over now or later and run without the passive for better sound? It would not get as loud as it would run passive with the AP1000 2 channel, but it might be loud enough, not much more expensive, and sound better?

http://www.millionbuy.com/prfap1040.html

Dennis

Cool. tell me more about this.

dwynne

07-19-2007, 10:22 PM

Cool. tell me more about this.

A technical explanation, but does have diagrams:

http://sound.westhost.com/biamp-vs-passive.htm

http://sound.westhost.com/bi-amp.htm

Also here: http://www.rocketroberts.com/techart/multi_amp.htm

You have a sub and amp now, right? You could buy the 4 channel amp now and bridge it to two channel and (in theory) have the same power into 4 ohms as the 2 channel amp - for $5 more and 1/2" wider or so amp. Doing it this way or with the 2 channel amp means you have to find a place to mount/hide the passive crossovers (the boxes you see in the picture with the mids and tweeters).

You could then buy an active crossover or a nice head unit (Eclipse?) that does bi-amp with sub out (or tri-amp). You do not use the passive crossovers, but you run the signal from the head unit into the active crossover (or use the built in active i nthe head unit) and then feed mids signal to 2 channels of the 4 channel amp and the tweeter signal to the other 2 channels. You only have to mount/hide the active crossover (if used) and not the 2 passive ones that came with the speakers.

The downside is that with 2 channels you get 2x the power as you do running 4 channels, but you are (potentially) making life easier on the amp having to drive just the one speaker per channel directly. Just like when you add a sub and sub amp - all it has to do is produce the low frequencies and having a high pass in your front speakers means the speakers and the amp does not have to try to reproduce the lows. Makes the speakers happy and the amps happy.

Also you have gain controls for the tweets and the mids both on the active crossover and on the amps input so you have a lot more control of the balance of the two speakers. Some passive crossovers may have pad resistors in them to get the levels to balance, and these waste power. The coils in the passive crossovers also waste power.

If you got the 4 channel then you could hook it up direct to the mids only with 2 channels in 4 channel mode (not bridged) and see how it played (don't try it with the tweets). If you have no trouble driving them with 2 channels, then get an active crossover and bi-amp. If they just will not get loud enough to suit you with clean power, then bride the amp to 2 channels and use the passive crossovers than came with the speakers. You will have wasted $5, I guess.

I am sure if I screwed something up, one of the pros here will straighten me out :eek:

Dennis

Trepkos

07-20-2007, 12:00 AM

This is my current "plan to buy" headunit:

Kenwood eXcelon KDC-X791
URL: http://tinyurl.com/2mc9wd

Thanks for the information dwynne though it kinda confused. But you were basically speaking of running the tweeters and mids through different channels on a 4-channel amplifier using an active crossover and whatnot, am I correct?

Also, what are some examples of active crossovers?

Also if you have an IM service we could perhaps discuss this more indepth there.

But I was thinking of an idea to have a four channel amplifier powering two different component sets or even two of the same.

AcidicDreams

07-20-2007, 12:08 AM

More is not better, you only need front comps...

remember, Stereo, two channels..

not to mention it's a single cab pickup...

Trepkos

07-20-2007, 12:48 AM

More is not better, you only need front comps...

remember, Stereo, two channels..

not to mention it's a single cab pickup...

Yay! Ok

dwynne

07-20-2007, 08:29 AM

Take the money you were going to spend on extra amp channels for the rear and for the rear speakers and buy better stuff for the front :) .

The Kicker KX3 or the Clarion MCD360 would work, but those are just fairly inexpensive ones they sell at online stores - there are tons more.

You would run line outs from the head unit to a 3-way x-over, then run your sub amp off of the x-over and have 4 RCAs coming off that would go to a 4 channel amp. Those would be left tweet, right tweet, left mid, right mid. You would wire the outputs of the 4 channel amp directly to the tweets and mids without using the passive crossover supplied with the component speakers. Some of the passive crossovers have a tweeter current protector that you would lose if you don't use their x-over, so you would need to set the levels on the tweet channels so you did not over-drive them - or use some type of "fuse" to limit the current.

You could also run the sub off the headunit (since it has a sub out) and use a 2 way x-over to drive the 4 channels.

Dennis

Flipx99

07-20-2007, 08:31 AM

What truck?

DejaWiz

07-20-2007, 09:28 AM

1. Take the money you were going to spend on extra amp channels for the rear and for the rear speakers and buy better stuff for the front :) .

2. The Kicker KX3 or the Clarion MCD360 would work, but those are just fairly inexpensive ones they sell at online stores - there are tons more.

You would run line outs from the head unit to a 3-way x-over, then run your sub amp off of the x-over and have 4 RCAs coming off that would go to a 4 channel amp. Those would be left tweet, right tweet, left mid, right mid. You would wire the outputs of the 4 channel amp directly to the tweets and mids without using the passive crossover supplied with the component speakers. Some of the passive crossovers have a tweeter current protector that you would lose if you don't use their x-over, so you would need to set the levels on the tweet channels so you did not over-drive them - or use some type of "fuse" to limit the current.

3. You could also run the sub off the headunit (since it has a sub out) and use a 2 way x-over to drive the 4 channels.

Dennis

1. Agreed.

2. Don't both of those 3way xovers lack a band-pass for the midranges? I'd recommend the Memphis 16-XO3 or the Profile RX30R, which both have band-pass filters and are fairly inexpensive with a bit of looking.

3. I'd recommend just running a 3-way active setup, although that can be a viable alternative.

dwynne

07-20-2007, 10:37 AM

2. Don't both of those 3way xovers lack a band-pass for the midranges? I'd recommend the Memphis 16-XO3 or the Profile RX30R, which both have band-pass filters and are fairly inexpensive with a bit of looking.

I think the KX3 would work, I just grabbed the model numbers from the first place I checked. The two models you mention should work fine and can be had for less.

The only question would be - is the 4 channel enough amp to run the mids to the levels the owner desires? If so, then it would seem a non-brainer - pay $5-10 more for the 4 channel amp and $40-50 for the x-over and toss the passives that come with the components.

Dennis

DejaWiz

07-20-2007, 10:44 AM

Probably not. But if the money is going to be invested to run a 3-way active setup down the road, why start with a bridged 4 channel and passive crossovers only to lose that bridged power when it comes time to go active?

Start with a stonger 2 channel, and if you want to go active (which I wouldn't do with a cheaper set of passive comps anyway), then buy a fairly low power and inexpensive 2 channel at that time to drive the tweeters.

dwynne

07-20-2007, 10:56 AM

I think the 1000 and 1040 run the same power when you bridge the 1040 to 2 channels and it looks to sell for $5 more. So I was thinking you could run it now bridged passive or try it active and not be out much money at all. If you end up running it bridged for the mids it has the same power for $5-10 more and if it will run loud enough in 4 channel more then you are done :D . He did say he has a truck, maybe the cab is small enough to give him what he wants?

Dennis

DejaWiz

07-20-2007, 10:59 AM

My main concern is misbass authority with 75w vs 150w rms on those RSd's. All the reviews I've read state that applying around 150w rms per channel really make them shine for such a small price tag.

Trepkos

07-20-2007, 01:49 PM

Uhh.. :S

How would a active crossover fit into a setup with one 2-Channel Amp, one Mono Amp, and one component system?

Or would I be required to get and somehow bridge a 4-Channel amplifier to a 2-Channels(something Ive never done before) and make it send power seperately to the the midbass and tweeters but how would the active crossover be wired in that situation?

Never done any of this before but I think one component system should be sufficient for the cab of a truck.

dwynne

07-20-2007, 02:09 PM

I think I have succeeded in confusing you :confused: .

With a 2 channel amp, one pair of components, and one sub amp/woofer you would not need or use an active crossover - you would use the passive crossover that comes with the component set and the line out and sub out from your head unit.

You could use an active to split the aux out from the head unit to feed the two channel amp and the sub amp, if you wanted to. An external active crossover may offer better sound and more adjustments than your head unit would

For better sound you would need 4 channels for the components and 1 channel for the sub. To get this you would use a 3 way active crossover to split the line outs from the head unit and feed the tweeter amp, the mids amp, and the sub amp. You could do this with 3 amps or with 2 amps (a 4 channel + sub amp) and some folks make a 5 channel amp you could use. In this case you need the 3 way active crossover and would not use the passive crossovers that come with the components as you would feed each tweet and mid directly from an amp channel.

As DejaWiz suggested, you could get the 2 channel amp now and run passive and see how that sounds. If that works for you, then you are done. For better sound you could later add an active crossover and a 2nd 2 channel amp.